🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare

The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the recent timeframe. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are issued from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".

Nocturnal Warfare

As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from enemy soil, a capacity provided through current data. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming aerial threats roared overhead – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by Western partners.

Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through partner states. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from devastation and further power outages.

Ongoing Risks

Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.

With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: several casualties, damage and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a need that European nations are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The detailed framework from Washington provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.

Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, certainly, continue.

Tactical Assessments

It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a assumption well known to international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to relinquish the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.

Divergent Views

Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its benefit.

Current Realities

Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a just a single week to terminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.

While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.